Three Pictures

First of all, a great example of a "tonal merger" where the photographer is using the property to great (comedic) effect, very deliberately. Imagine how dull this shot would be in color if the human's shirt had been, say, green, or pink. (Thanks to John Camp for this.)

Second, in looking around for some pictures that illustrate tonal properties in black-and-white, I've gotten fascinated with this shot by Stan Banos:

Certainly nondescript and uninteresting subject matter. But consider how very different the graphic stucture of this picture is compared to its physical structure (to see the former, squint at the picture and pay attention only to the shape of the shadow and the horizontal line through the center; to see the latter, imagine the picture without any shadows). They really play off each other dramatically.

Tonally, here's the basic relationship:

Putting two tones adjacent to each other is like putting two musical notes adjacent to each other; they have a certain feeling. And then I get interested in all the slight outlinings and underlinings of tone, the details in the shadows, the delineating of the windows, the accents of black.

Of course, photographers (especially ones I see too much of these days, wading through endless seas of the online photo sites) always hope that pictures of nothing can elicit an interest or fascination by the mere act of drawing attention to something we might not otherwise pay attention to. But although this is its basic strategy, Stan's picture really works for me.

This Earth
The last picture I've been looking at is one of the most interesting, and I have to say, strangest color pictures I can remember seeing. It's one of the four pictures we'll be offering as prints in Ctein's print sale next week. It also has the distinction of being the subject of the only truly bad print of Ctein's I've ever seen—when he showed me his work print of it in Madison, he hadn't gotten close to where he wanted it yet. It was not good at that point. (I'm sure Ctein doesn't like me going on about this, but hey, when Tiger Woods misses the cut at a major, people talk.)

When he sent me the master guide prints for the sale—I got them day before yesterday—I half expected not to like the print I'm talking about. But he'd finished it, of course, and gotten it right. It's really fascinating. For one thing, it absolutely has to be a color picture—I've seen few pictures that are more "about" color. The color palette borders on bizarre. I'm not sure if the pictures falls more toward beautiful or surreal. I'm not even entirely sure it looks like the world—maybe, given Ctein's suspiciously intense interest in science fiction, it was taken on a different, but similar, planet. In fact, it is a naturalistic photograph of, yes, this Earth. And that's what makes it so amazing.

I'll have more to say about it when we do the "reveal" of the pics for the sale. Maybe by then I'll have lived with it long enough to have gotten it sorted out in my mind. In the meantime, it's pinned to my board. I'll keep looking at it.

Mike

Send this post to a friend

Please help support TOP by patronizing our sponsors B&H Photo and Amazon

Note: Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. More...
Original contents copyright 2011 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved.

Comments

[Harrison Cronbi]

Ah, Erwitt. He just can't be referred to or referenced enough in my book. One of the all time great visual wits.

I do like that Stan Banos shot. You say 'nondescript and uninteresting', I say 'semi-unremarkable' - a quality I recognise in a lot of successful street photographs. But this photo also plays a cruel visual trick; that inversion of shadows on the central rail (on the bottom of the rail, but on top in the central section) temporarily plays on one's sense of Escherian geometry.

Interesting to read your likening tones to musical notes. The more I print and look at black and white photographs, the more I find myself referring to highlights, midtones and shadows as the soprano, the alto/tenor and the bass, and the more I think of tonal relationships as chords.

[Edd Fuller]

Mike, your comment about the "mere act of drawing attention to something we might not otherwise pay attention to" intriques me.

I am not an artist, and it is probably stretching it to say I am a photographer. I am just a guy with a camera and most often, the best I can hope for is that my pictures somehow "pay attention." I mostly fail at this, but it is worth pursuing because, to me, illuminating the commonplace is one of the great strengths of photography. It's a place to start, anyway.

[phil]

Hi Mike,

Interesting effect on the Stan Banos image, it reminds me of the illusory images with parallel lines through circles etc.
I suspect it took a lot of setting up as the way the base of the shadow just touches the wall/ground join, the horizontals align with the mid-point of the windows and the diagonal just misses the window and chair corners means there is only one time of day, and possibly only twice a year, that the image could be taken.

it reminds me of this image;
http://shutterfinger.typepad.com/shutterfinger/2011/07/a-new-look-a-new-approach.html

all the best phil

[David]

I like that photo, shabby chic is not dead as some have supposed.

[Pak-Ming Wan]

Wow, that photo really does play with your mind! If you concentrate on the shadow part of the wall and cover the other parts, you would almost think that the line going through the wall is recessed not relief. And only on the highlight sections can you tell that it is actually relief.

Pak

[Stan B.]

Phil- As for time spent setting up- the time to get off my bike, put camera to face and compose (ie- luck of the draw)...

[Michael Farrell]

My attempt at threading the tonal merger needle:

http://img585.imageshack.us/img585/1295/gorestreet111.jpg

With digital, by setting the display to black-and-white, the visualization is a little easier.

[erlik]

Funnily enough, I read about Erwitt's exhibition in New York just yesterday. Open till August 28.

[phil]

@Stan B. In that case, well done for a good spot! I'd imagined you seeing the shadow move each day until it was just so.
Thought provoking image.

cheers phil

[Dennis]

I'm hoping to hit the exhibit at the ICP next week while my lovely ladies hit the American Girl doll store :) (Take the credit card & have fun !)

Your article neatly expresses exactly why I don't do b/w conversions. It's because I don't envision them in b/w in the first place - I have no intention of producing b/w images when I take pictures. I don't look at my pictures in b/w on any regular basis and only occasionally see a picture after downloading that strikes me as something that would look good converted. Sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn't, but it's nothing I try on a regular basis or use to rescue photos (ok, I do try once in a while and you're right - it almost never works). When a conversion occasionally works, I'll sometimes keep it that way. (I know I can always undo it). But it's never a result I'm comfortable with precisely because I believe that unless there's some intent, you're just monkeying around and your results are accidental. And sure, there's nothing wrong with the occasional accident (notably the shot that had something in it that you didn't see at the time you took the picture) but it's not really satisfying. As an amateur, I have the luxury of not needing good results. So I can do photography for the enjoyment of doing it as much as for the result. I also happen to think I have an eye for color, but maybe that's just me :) (Don't look at my gallery; there's nothing remotely recent in there and nothing that would back up this claim !)

[Michael Ward]

I like this, creating interest and curiocity out of the mundane. Kurt Schwitters did the same thing for me many years ago. I have said and have been condemed for the remark that part of a photographers learning should include drawing and basic design. Bresson knew this as have many other notable photographers. The fact that he ended his days drawing only enforces this argument. André Kertész went through the same reductive exercise with his wonderful polaroids and still lifes.

[Rod Graham]

What Edd said. I find myself in that same boat, working hard to "see" the things not seen right under our noses everyday. Maybe not great art, but satisfying to me.

Rod Graham

[John Brewton]

Uh, Mike, where's the last picture?

[phil]

Can't resist;
http://richardwiseman.wordpress.com/2011/08/16/best-optical-illusion-video-ever/
;-)

[Dave Sailer]

I discovered a little blog which happens, today, to have a good example of tonal contrast, plus use of tone to focus the attention and pop the subject out of the background.

It's titled "funsters" and is at:
http://pretty-pix.blogspot.com/2011/08/funsters_17.html

Can't say who dunnit, where, or when, but by me is as good a gimmick photo as anything Erwitt ever did.

Plus being sorta on topic. Kinda. I think anyway.

[Michael Ward]

Looking at this image again I'm thinking that shadow is a bit on the light side, PS shadow and highlight control perhaps...
I am not against the use of such things if they bring out the best of an image, it could quite easliy be done in a wet darkroom so its ok? Yes / no!

[Shubh]

Dear Mike, what makes a great photo?